These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Closure vs non-closure of the visceral and parietal peritoneum at cesarean delivery: 16 year study.
    Author: Weerawetwat W, Buranawanich S, Kanawong M.
    Journal: J Med Assoc Thai; 2004 Sep; 87(9):1007-11. PubMed ID: 15515998.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To determine whether non-closure of visceral and parietal peritoneum at LSCS has advantages over peritoneal closure with regard to postoperative complication and adhesions. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Paholpolpayuhasena Hospital, Kanchanaburi province, Thailand SUBJECTS AND METHOD: Three hundred and sixty full-term pregnant women undergoing first cesarean section were divided into 3 groups (N = 120). Group A: non-closure of both visceral and parietal peritoneum. Group B. non-closure of only visceral peritoneum. Group C: closure of both visceral and parietal peritoneum. Postoperative complications were compared. Adhesions were evaluated in 65 patients returning for a second LSCS and compared for severity of adhesions. The three groups were compared using statistical analysis. RESULT: There was no significant statistical difference between group A and C, group B and C for postoperative complications or number of adhesion formation. However, adhesions in the closure group were more severe. CONCLUSIONS: Closure of visceral and parietal peritoneum has no benefit over non-closure of visceral peritoneum and non-closure of both visceral and parietal peritoneum at LSCS.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]